pvxfandomcom-20200214-history
PvXwiki:Admin noticeboard/Resolved Build-Specific Issues/Archive 16
Not sure how to sum it up. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 00:46, 3 January 2008 (EST) :Archive. Lord Belar 19:27, 3 January 2008 (EST) ::Was usable for about a week, and wasn't too prominent. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 20:40, 3 January 2008 (EST) :::Revote. Lord Belar 21:00, 3 January 2008 (EST) ::::Was never really good. We're having a repeat of the touch ranger with this one. -- Armond Warblade 00:30, 4 January 2008 (EST) :::::Let's just delete it before we waste all of our time fighting over it. Unlike the touch ranger, this doesn't work even if it's not countered. Lord Belar 13:50, 4 January 2008 (EST) ::::::uh, no. - [[User:Y0_ich_halt|'Y0_ich_halt']] 14:39, 4 January 2008 (EST) It's been archived. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 18:50, 10 January 2008 (EST) : Armond removed all favorable votes for the build despite a number of them made after and recognizing the nerf. Armond's comments for those were, "Nerfed HARD" or "Nerfed harder than that", but I don't see that as his place to judge, admin or not. The voters explained their views in light of the nerf. The fact that he left all negative votes made during the same time period shows a bias on Armond's part during cleanup, which is unfair to those who voted after the nerf. Armond's own personal vote on the build reflects this. Archived or not, the build is still viable and I do not agree with Armond's decisions with regard to vote cleanup. -- Hercanic 16:22, 13 January 2008 (EST) ::Unfortunately, you happen to be wrong. A build whose DPS is outdone by a warrior with a sword and frenzy, and is far more squishy and energy-intensive, is not meant to be stored at PvX. -- Armond Warblade 17:03, 13 January 2008 (EST) ::: Wrong? My point was never about the build itself, but the way in which you chose to remove any favorable votes while leaving the most negative, despite both being done during the same time period and recognizing the nerf to the build. -- Hercanic 02:19, 14 January 2008 (EST) The build has been significantly changed since most of the rates were made, wipe please. -- Mafaraxas 18:21, 4 January 2008 (EST) :Done. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 17:34, 13 January 2008 (EST) Here, Massive's vote also needs to be removed. Standard means great, and I don't see how this is conditional. Maybe in that Water Trident needs to hit a moving target, but that's the point of the hex snares. Aura of Stability won't counter this to the extent that it becomes unworkable, because the snares still apply. Icy Shackles doesn't apply here, because to use it would be to skew the concept of the build, that is, to cripple enemies so that Water Trident can more reliably hit a moving foe. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 15:52, 5 January 2008 (EST) :Done. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 17:35, 13 January 2008 (EST) Just take a quick look. Most of the high votes are wrong.Bob fregman 21:59, 8 January 2008 (EST) :/agree. they ignore obvious energy problems and the lack of solid defense on this particular squishytank. ~ [[User:ZamaneeJinn|'ʑʌɱʌɳəəɺɨɳɳ']] ( ) 20:41, 12 January 2008 (EST) ::The lack of defense is like saying the old boa sin sucked bacause it didnt have any defense. And this has a heal, unlike the boa sin. And the boa sin kicked some super major ass. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 21:25, 12 January 2008 (EST) Removed votes with no semblance of reasoning. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 17:41, 13 January 2008 (EST) All votes prior to Shadowsin's were for a different build. Build creator has since updated and has requested that the votes be removed. -- [[User:Scottie theNerd|'Scottie_theNerd']] (argue/ 14:31, 8 January 2008 (EST) :Nyktos vote is clearly wrong, AoB, While bad for PvP definatly has its uses in PvE. Also Votes still need removed/reviewd.--[[User:Shadowsin|'Shadow'sin]] 22:43, 8 January 2008 (EST) The build is bad, in any case, and will be trashed. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 17:49, 13 January 2008 (EST) A few flawed votes as far as innovation goes. -- Mafaraxas 06:53, 12 January 2008 (EST) :Fixed. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 17:50, 13 January 2008 (EST) "Already a build like this" hardly warrants a 0-0-0. --20pxGuildof 09:52, 12 January 2008 (EST) Changed to Trial for rewrite. So rating should be removed. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 11:14, 12 January 2008 (EST) :By that I mean every rating should be removed because it was rewritten and no votes on trial builds, so could an admin please take a minute or so to remove the votes? --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 22:00, 12 January 2008 (EST) ::I got it. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(sysop) 22:40, 12 January 2008 (EST) :::Thx. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 22:43, 12 January 2008 (EST) Rihadol-didn't realise that meta gives effectivness of 4-also the build is quite felxiable there are completly seperate builds put underneath the standard ones as alternative (Ele OF tank and FC necro etc.), don't think it warrents a 2 in univ.PheNaxKian (T/ ) 13:59, 12 January 2008 (EST) :Fixed. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 17:51, 13 January 2008 (EST) Goldenstar doesn't get Hero battles. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 21:08, 8 January 2008 (EST) :Unexist got it. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 20:52, 14 January 2008 (EST) Klomi's vote misrepresents the build's abilities. 100 armor-ignoring damage every ~8 seconds is great. Throwing around hexes is meant to achieve a huge DPS to rival that of a generic fire ele, which this does quite admirably. Rating a mesmer poorly because its squishy is ludicrious. And the vote is unnecessarily rude. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 19:50, 13 January 2008 (EST) :Skakid got it, Klomi got a warning. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(sysop) 20:07, 13 January 2008 (EST) WTB reason. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 20:02, 13 January 2008 (EST) :At who? - [[User:Unexist|'Unexist']] 05:10, 15 January 2008 (EST) ::Goldenstar. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 19:57, 15 January 2008 (EST) Yes i know it's back up again -.-. Alleskapot for a clear lack of skill blah blah etc. and possiably Gates assassin might need reviewing... (sorry about posting it again -.-) PheNaxKian (T/ ) 12:13, 14 January 2008 (EST) :Unexist resolved it I believe. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 23:05, 14 January 2008 (EST) ::it appears so, but his votes back and it appears alleskapot hasn't listened (I asked him on his talk page a couple of hours to review his vote, but there hasn't been a response or change to his vote...)PheNaxKian (T/ ) 12:36, 15 January 2008 (EST) :::How many times has alleskapot's vote bee removed and re-added? [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 13:05, 15 January 2008 (EST) ::::I think this is the first time (not sure), but i've noticed him doing the same on other builds (330hp venguful spirit bonder down bellow it seems) don't know if they're the only ones though...PheNaxKian (T/ ) 13:39, 15 January 2008 (EST) Dark says siggie has less spammability than blindbot. Signet RC's in ~5 sec and gives double blind each time (tranfer with plague touch). Meaning 4 blinds in just over 10 sec. Touch range with caster in TA isn't really a big deal. TA hasn't got a front/backline like GvG, etc. It's pretty much the same, plus you have a monk to prot you. While a B-surger might be better for blinding this build is very much different because it has Div/shame/SoH/Leech. A b-surger focuses on blinding and spike support (wards and splinter at times). Comparing them is a shame tbh. [[User:Swiftslash|'Swiftslash \\']] ( *''sandbox'') 16:27, 14 January 2008 (EST) :Touch range is dead giveaway for Interrupt Rangers. Compounded with the longer recharge means you'll need to basically spam on recharge, so you've got a easy d-shot. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 16:30, 14 January 2008 (EST) ::Bait ints with a melee weapon. They see you coming into touch range and they fire when you make contact. Also siggie is 0.5 sec cast, and only +recharge ints really hurt. AND last but not least, if they're somehow (meaning you're failing at baiting, blinding their ranger, if they have one, etc) inting you Siggie or Ptouch it means you can use shame and div and SoH freely. [[User:Swiftslash|'Swiftslash \\']] ( *''sandbox'') 16:33, 14 January 2008 (EST) ::You can cancel, which ownzzz or feint use which will have the ranger waste his ints (and that means less ints on your monk!). Removed unnecessarily low votes. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 16:35, 14 January 2008 (EST) :::O right. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 17:00, 14 January 2008 (EST) And I'm not saying you have to 5-5-5, but it's not trash. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 17:07, 14 January 2008 (EST) Tifa Yawa's vote. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 19:39, 14 January 2008 (EST) :Got it. - [[User:Unexist|'Unexist']] 05:07, 15 January 2008 (EST) Deepseeker's vote. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 19:54, 14 January 2008 (EST) :Got it. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(sysop) 19:56, 14 January 2008 (EST) ::And that puts it down to a 2.49 XD ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(sysop) 19:57, 14 January 2008 (EST) :::Damn, I wish there was a way to rate it 2.49. :P Lord Belar 20:02, 14 January 2008 (EST) Craziinick's vote needs to be addressed. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 22:41, 14 January 2008 (EST) :Dealt with. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 23:03, 14 January 2008 (EST) Not that it will affect the average rating much, but Alleskapot's vote. -- Mafaraxas 00:34, 15 January 2008 (EST) :Got it. - [[User:Unexist|'Unexist']] 05:09, 15 January 2008 (EST) I got a WELL tag on my build for N/A. Can anyone help?19px[[User:Crossfirexiv|'Crossfirexiv']] 15:07, 15 January 2008 (EST) :Fixed. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 16:25, 15 January 2008 (EST) can someone please deal with the wrong votes? e.g. sjeps, howlinghobo, saji-kun... maybe mine if you want to :P - [[User:Y0_ich_halt|'Y0_ich_halt']] 16:42, 15 January 2008 (EST) :Resolved. Mike Tycn(punch ) 19:51, 15 January 2008 (EST) Following Skaddidles' reasoning on Thc's vote, Jimeno's vote needs to be removed. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 18:48, 15 January 2008 (EST) :Resolved. Mike Tycn(punch ) 19:51, 15 January 2008 (EST) While the build's sorta meh, Voidwalker's trash vote is completely false. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 18:52, 15 January 2008 (EST) :So not completely, but the part about microing the hero is. Even tested it myself, the only necessary micromanagement is casting Boon the beginning of every map. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 19:19, 15 January 2008 (EST) People seem to be just dropping comments instead of actually evaluating the build in the ratings section when they should be making comments like that on the talk page (e.g Lann's and Timmy963's votes) --Hawk Skeer 16:43, 16 January 2008 (EST) :Read my rating tbh. [[User:Victoryisyours|'V↓c±☺ryïsy☼µr§‼']] (''talk''/ ) 16:46, 16 January 2008 (EST) ::Your rating is actually a rating. --Hawk Skeer 16:55, 16 January 2008 (EST) Fixed. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 16:52, 16 January 2008 (EST) Rating page needs some help. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 22:10, 8 January 2008 (EST) :Getting a 0 univeraslity rating (to complete the awesomeness)? And is that in a good way (ratings go up, remove bad) or a bad way (ratings go down, remove good)? --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 22:12, 8 January 2008 (EST) ::So what are the admins/BMs (lol, same abreviation for bowel movements, aka poos) gonna do about this one? --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 19:55, 15 January 2008 (EST) :::Can't really decide, tbh. It does seem comparably slow to the A/E, but I suppose it could be vetted as it can be used to solo any boss without anti-shadow form or anti-hex, as well as being able to have a 100% chance of targeting. Yeah, the votes should be removed I guess (talking to myself ftw!) — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 20:14, 16 January 2008 (EST) :::(EC)Builds such as these offer the only venue for farming the builds its intended for; as such, every vote rejecting the build because its slow needs to be removed, because there's nothing to contrast with to reach a conclusion that it's slow. However, the admin (or BM!) has the prerogative in deciding whether or not the accomplished task is worthy enough to warrant a "Good" or "Great" rating. Corollary: There's no point in keeping a build that farms something worthless. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 20:16, 16 January 2008 (EST) ::::Shen also brings up good points. Resolved. Take up any problems on the talk page to reduce clutter here. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 20:19, 16 January 2008 (EST) Swift Thief's vote. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 22:09, 17 January 2008 (EST) :But thatll trash it and its got such a cool name. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 22:13, 17 January 2008 (EST) :Fixed. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 02:26, 18 January 2008 (EST) Darius179's vote. 1: Complains about lack of shadow step when there are two optional slots. 2: Recommends a skill which makes no sense whatsoever. (recharge, damage) 3: Universality vote makes no sense as build is adaptable to any place. Seb2net (Talk) 08:32, 18 January 2008 (EST) :You don't list a Shadow Step as a variant. You misunderstand Universality, and are wrong in making claims for the build based on your misconception. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 10:07, 18 January 2008 (EST) ::k, just wanted to clear it up. Seb2net (Talk) 10:17, 18 January 2008 (EST) RA/TA tags have been removed, votes relating to it should be too. Also, if its still good, something should be done of votes complaining about skill balancing, in particular, Tycn's. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 10:07, 18 January 2008 (EST) Ajmaresh's vote. I can think of a very great example of a worse build: User:Mgrinshpon/Leet/A/Mo Pressure Resser. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 17:48, 18 January 2008 (EST) :Skakid got it. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(sysop) 21:23, 18 January 2008 (EST) Og Lo cant be serious. 14:45, 19 January 2008 (EST) :I think he is, but hes being stupid. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 14:47, 19 January 2008 (EST) ::Removed. Also removed GuildofDeal's vote, for the time being. -Auron 19:04, 19 January 2008 (EST) Hasn't been nerfed to Other section. Regardless, one should question votes made before additional skill balances have been implemented. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 21:02, 19 January 2008 (EST) This shouldn't even have been vetted, in my opinion. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 22:10, 19 January 2008 (EST) :So it's got a 2.49, and is set to be trashed, but it needs to be well'ed, as sufficient reasoning has been provided. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 22:38, 19 January 2008 (EST) Alleskapot's vote.[[User:Teh Uber Pwnzer|''' — Teh Uber Pwnzer']] 04:31, 20 January 2008 (EST) :One of those people that, for some fucktarded reason, haunts the pages they voted to make sure their crap vote stays... -- Mafaraxas 11:58, 20 January 2008 (EST) Unexist's vote is wrong now that flail has been switched to flurry and that the sin deosnt even spike. And Shogunshen's also is wrong about the same things as it draws from unexist's vote. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(''talk)]] 12:59, 20 January 2008 (EST) :Changed. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 13:12, 20 January 2008 (EST) Gate assassins vote. Don't see how if the only problem is that it's slow that it gets a 3 in effectiveness.PheNaxKian (T/ ) 13:35, 20 January 2008 (EST) Not surviving in a split just means it doesn't work if you attempt to fit it in any team other than a specially suited one. Should one argue conversely, that is, effectiveness takes a toll because it can't split, such a flaw would not warrant a 4 in universality. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 17:41, 20 January 2008 (EST) :He changed his vote. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 15:41, 21 January 2008 (EST) ::=D Belgianbronco 15:47, 21 January 2008 (EST) VIktor's vote, the build has an IAS. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 18:28, 20 January 2008 (EST) :Cant you get it? --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 18:41, 20 January 2008 (EST) ::To avoid any potential accusations of bias, he chose to defer to another 'neutral' party. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 18:42, 20 January 2008 (EST) :::O i c, its his build. My bad. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 18:43, 20 January 2008 (EST) Seeing as Deadly Arts caster's can't deal with the DP nerf, the build doesn't constitute a comparison between other Caster Sins, so Zuranthium's vote is invalid. Lillith Abbadon misunderstands universality. And even if he did, the reasoning for effectiveness would be enough to contradict the 5 in universality. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 19:57, 20 January 2008 (EST) User:Shogunshen's vote. Guardian + distracting shot = no more guardian. "Parasitic Bond > this"? What does that even mean? Cuz if he thinks that brutal weapon is like forked arrow in that it fails when hexed, im gonna have to lol. Also, expert focus is neccessary to energy management, so no there isnt apply poison. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 21:11, 20 January 2008 (EST) :Yea, about Brutal Weapon... [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 21:14, 20 January 2008 (EST) ::Yea, what? Only fails under no enchantments, which this build only has 1 of: holy veil. Lern 2 read. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 21:16, 20 January 2008 (EST) :::I know. That's why I changed my vote. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 21:18, 20 January 2008 (EST) ::::Your vote is still wrong as you sadi that a warrior has more DPS than one of these rangers. Go test on the master of damage. I used a Shock Axe with 13 strength and 14 axe mastery for 94 seconds with frenzy on constantly. I got 43 damage per second, which may be slightly low since I used a zealous axe, but it was 15^50. I did the same thing with one of these rangers. I used a 15^50 zealous recurve bow over 100 seconds and got 51 damage per second (no brutal weapon too). Now the thing is, this was vs a stationary target with a constant IAS for the warrior, while people usually run from warriors, causing them to drop their IAS's, lowering their adrenaline flow, adn causing a much lower DPS. Now a ranger doesnt have to worry about this. As long as a target doesnt leave range, even if they move the DPS is still the same. So explain to me how a warrior is better here? --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 21:42, 20 January 2008 (EST) :::::Knockdowns and adrenal spikes makes warriors a lot more of a threat than those rangers. Mike Tycn(punch ) 00:36, 21 January 2008 (EST) ::::::Only knockdowns, I was spamming adrenaline skills. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 06:24, 21 January 2008 (EST) :::::::Adrenal spikes. The ability of warriors to quickly spike down targets on low health forces monks to keep protting and healing their team members up to near full health, which pressures more than a predictable high DPS. Mike Tycn(punch ) 06:43, 21 January 2008 (EST) ::::::::He still says the DPS of a warrior is greater than that of a ranger, which is wrong, and even tehn deosnt constitute a 0 in effectiveness. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 07:26, 21 January 2008 (EST) :::::::::Agreed, done. Mike Tycn(punch ) 07:39, 21 January 2008 (EST) ::::::::::I changed my vote to be more specific, but if you are referring to RAW DPS, as in, auto-attacking, I'm right. If you are referring to RAW DPS, as in, using attack skills, I'm still right. Right? [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 09:45, 21 January 2008 (EST) :::::::::::No, I used attack skills, and I used a constant IAS, and teh ranger had more DPS. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 09:58, 21 January 2008 (EST) ::::::::::::The Master of Damage does not take 100 Damage from Deep Wound into account. Shock Axe wins. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 10:03, 21 January 2008 (EST) :::::::::::::Which only would have counted every 19 seconds when deep wound wore off, so only another 5 DPS, which makes the total 48 to 51. Shock axe loses. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 10:08, 21 January 2008 (EST) ::::::::::::::I honestly can't fathom how you could calculate that. An extra 100 armor-ignoring damage every time Eviscerate recharges puts Shock Axe over the top. Why are you going by the length of DW? There simply isn't a reason. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 10:12, 21 January 2008 (EST) :::::::::::::::Because you do no additional damage with deep wound if you just reapply it. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 10:14, 21 January 2008 (EST) ::::::::::::::::In which case, the enemy monk fails at monking, and your job killing the opposing player is that much easier. Ressmonkey, this is ridiculous. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 10:16, 21 January 2008 (EST) :::::::::::::::::Yes it is ridiculous, but that deosnt mean that Im not gonna argua about it. So if the Deep Wound is removed, the DPS drops by 100/time as its not real damage being dealt. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 10:18, 21 January 2008 (EST) ::::::::::::::::::Taking that into account completely skews the results from the Master of Damage. That's the worst argument you've come up with yet, as that screws over your figures. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 10:25, 21 January 2008 (EST) :::::::::::::::::::How? --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 10:28, 21 January 2008 (EST) (Reset)The Master of Damage "dies", then gets back to full health still inflicted with DW. As I recall, human players are not like this. Which means you can't even compare, through Master of Damage's Figures, DPS from those Rangers to the damage from a Shock Axe. However, in any practical setting, Shock Axe Wins. Which means my original point, that DPS is higher from a Warrior, is indeed valid. However, I wish to see an Admin/BM's perspective before I break 1RV. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 16:12, 21 January 2008 (EST) :And human players dont die so quickly. If you want to do it that way, how often does an enemy die with deep wound on? Take the time, divide 100 by it and add it on the DPS, but ur vote doesnt even mention DPS anymore. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 16:16, 21 January 2008 (EST) Never use MoD DPS as an example for something. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 16:20, 21 January 2008 (EST) :Except as an example of DPS... --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 16:23, 21 January 2008 (EST) ::No. Ability to kill a Master of Damage quickly and ability to kill 1 target in a team of 4 to 8 players are 2 completely different things and can't be even remotely compared. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 16:26, 21 January 2008 (EST) :::(EC) I was going to post, but Skakid disclosed the issue too efficiently. Though if Skakid is saying DPS can't be compared, that means Tycn's removal of my vote on the basis that RAW DPS from rangers are superior to that of a warrior is unfounded. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 16:33, 21 January 2008 (EST) ::::Changed my vote. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 16:39, 21 January 2008 (EST) It's not an objective vote, so it needs to be removed. Scatter simply doesn't happen. Matti Nuke's vote. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 21:25, 20 January 2008 (EST) Matti Nuke's vote flagrantly misrepresents the build's capabilities. [[User:Shogunshen| Shen]]( ) 21:26, 20 January 2008 (EST) Ricky Vantof's vote... -- Mafaraxas 00:06, 21 January 2008 (EST) Also, Rapta's vote. -- Mafaraxas 00:06, 21 January 2008 (EST) :Done, Rapta's vote is fine and makes a valid point. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 15:44, 21 January 2008 (EST) No votes in Trial. --- [[User:Ressmonkey|'Ressmonkey']] [[User Talk:Ressmonkey|(talk)]] 12:08, 21 January 2008 (EST) :Got it. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(sysop) 13:07, 21 January 2008 (EST) All votes, since build was remade (and moved). [[User:Swiftslash|'Swiftslash \\']] ( *''sandbox'') 16:45, 22 January 2008 (EST) :Viola. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 16:51, 22 January 2008 (EST) ::Viola? What are you a girl named Viola? It's Voila tbh :) [[User:Swiftslash|'Swiftslash \\']] ( *''sandbox'') 16:53, 22 January 2008 (EST) :::*restores votes and laughs* — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 16:54, 22 January 2008 (EST) ::::*gives French dictionary* Poor sod. Tsk. [[User:Swiftslash|'Swiftslash \\']] ( *''sandbox'') 16:59, 22 January 2008 (EST) Rwrited it a bit, vote wipe plx. [[User:Dark_Morphon|'Dark']] [[User_talk:Dark_Morphon|'Morphon']] 05:05, 25 January 2008 (EST) If another party could review the situation, it'd be lovely. -Shen 19:34, 22 January 2008 (EST) :Its PvE shen get over it.--[[User:Shadowsin|'Shadow'sin]]image:Shadowsin_sig.PNG 01:09, 24 January 2008 (EST) ::It's PvXwiki, Shadowsin. Get over it. -- [[User:Scottie theNerd|'Scottie_theNerd']] (argue/ /complain) 01:23, 24 January 2008 (EST) :::Its not a bad build scottie, and it doesnt deserve a 1.--[[User:Shadowsin|'Shadow'sin]]image:Shadowsin_sig.PNG 01:31, 24 January 2008 (EST) ::::Before it (might) gets out of control: don't continue the arguments here, please. -- Mafaraxas 01:34, 24 January 2008 (EST) Please Check any vote that mentions MS/DB, The build was not built/ment for DPS, which any sin using anything but daggers is bound to have less of, its functionality and purpose are extremely different and any vote comparing it to the MS/DB should be removed/revised.--[[User:Shadowsin|'Shadow'sin]]image:Shadowsin_sig.PNG 01:58, 24 January 2008 (EST) :P.S. That means you Mafaraxas.--[[User:Shadowsin|'Shadow'sin]]image:Shadowsin_sig.PNG 02:01, 24 January 2008 (EST) ::<3 you too. gj on the name, btw. -- Mafaraxas 02:39, 24 January 2008 (EST) :::<3 and Its late, gimme a break xD jeese, you had to have a difficult name too...--[[User:Shadowsin|'Shadow'sin]]image:Shadowsin_sig.PNG 02:46, 24 January 2008 (EST) ::::Just put an a between each consonant. Or say 'maf'. w/e. -- Mafaraxas 10:56, 24 January 2008 (EST) Shadowsins vote. It can cap any shrine in 5-7 seconds, fend off solo sins, and maintains constant ims along with health regen. Therefore, i think he should provide a reason.Bob fregman 22:15, 24 January 2008 (EST) :It's a dupe of the one in "Other". Build is merged, tagged for deletion. Re-vote in Build:E/D Mystic Heater. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 23:37, 24 January 2008 (EST) ::Moved to new place now. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 16:27, 25 January 2008 (EST) Move to userspace please. (vĭk'tə-rē ĭz 22:17, 24 January 2008 (EST) :Move to great imo.Bob fregman 23:19, 24 January 2008 (EST) "Is very leet" doesn't qualify a 5-5-5. Anyway, complete and utter tripe. --20pxGuildof 15:24, 25 January 2008 (EST) :You must be out of your mind. This is new meta. [[User:Swiftslash|'Swiftslash \\']] ( *''sandbox'') 15:27, 25 January 2008 (EST) ::Then put it in your namespace and stop wasting space on the "Testing" category. --20pxGuildof 15:37, 25 January 2008 (EST) :::Is not mine. And seriously, what harm's it gonna do? Take up space yes, give good laughs yes. Unless a bazillion of joke builds come up to take space then it's not really a prob. [[User:Swiftslash|'Swiftslash \\']] ( *''sandbox'') 15:50, 25 January 2008 (EST) ::::NO. -Shen 15:54, 25 January 2008 (EST) :::::GoD's making it sound like it's the end of the world. It's pretty obvious my vote was a joke... [[User:Swiftslash|'Swiftslash \\']] ( *''sandbox'') 16:02, 25 January 2008 (EST) ::::::OMGZ JAN 29 MEETYOR HITS EERF IS END O WORLD — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 16:03, 25 January 2008 (EST) Get this page off now! I am S.F. and I did NOT consent to my name being used. Now get it off. —''The preceding unsigned comment was added by'' Jakekizoo ( ) }. The page doesn't exist. Mike Tycn(punch ) 02:22, 26 January 2008 (EST) :Unfortunately for you, it doesn't matter. Neither that page nor the proper spelling of the page exists (or has ever existed), either. Not to mention there's no proof that you are S.F. (whoever that may be). -- Armond Warblade 04:29, 26 January 2008 (EST) ::I found the build - it was at A/R Silent Footstepps. -- Armond Warblade 04:31, 26 January 2008 (EST) :::I have deleted the build as per PvX:WELL. It was neither original nor useful. -- Armond Warblade 04:33, 26 January 2008 (EST) Zainok, Voidwalker, and Tifa Yawa's votes complaining for the lack of energy management can be dismissed simply because this build is for hero use. Heroes can't be expected to use power heals with the ^50% health requirement, so relatively speaking, this hero has excellent energy management inherent in the powerful damage reduction of Life Sheath. -Shen 10:19, 26 January 2008 (EST) Needs a vote wipe, Pluto rewrote half the bar. -Shen 11:32, 26 January 2008 (EST) :Oops, no he didn't. Attributes are much better though, and Savage in place of Screaming helps tremendously. -Shen 11:33, 26 January 2008 (EST) ::Skakid, I voted just now, hehe. -Shen 11:42, 26 January 2008 (EST) I find it sort of ironic that Shen has all the disputes on this list so far, and here's finally one about him/her. Burning arrow does not do more degen. Say sure, the one skill does what the three do, that would affect effectiveness, not all three of the categories. Bluemilkman/Talk To Me 21:29, 26 January 2008 (EST) :You could take Screaming Shot and Toxicity on the BA ranger, but then, it'd be terrible without M-Touch and Savage. -Shen 21:31, 26 January 2008 (EST) ::That build sucks, theres no reason to nit-pick votes off of it. Bob fregman 21:37, 26 January 2008 (EST) :::Nit-pick votes, haha. I'm pretty sure disputing a 0-0-0 is not nit-picking. Obviously you haven't tried to use it at Aspenwood. Goodbye turtles. Bluemilkman/Talk To Me 21:40, 26 January 2008 (EST) ::::Or you can just interrupt turtles.Bob fregman 21:42, 26 January 2008 (EST) :::::Or you could just degen them to death. Bluemilkman/Talk To Me 21:44, 26 January 2008 (EST) ::::It was tagged for RA. -Shen 21:45, 26 January 2008 (EST) ::::::BA is fine for that, and can do other stuff too, unlike this.Bob fregman 21:45, 26 January 2008 (EST) Elaborated. -Shen 21:46, 26 January 2008 (EST) :You sacrifice survivability by not having mending touch, that's what you mean, right? Because that's the only skill this one doesn't have, besides the extra interrupt. The burning last for 4 seconds, the extra bleeding and poison last for a lot longer. This build can sustain a higher degen for a longer period of time. Bluemilkman/Talk To Me 21:52, 26 January 2008 (EST) ::I heard spirits can get killed, c/d? — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 21:55, 26 January 2008 (EST) :::I heard 120 hp and 40 armor is good defense.Bob fregman 21:57, 26 January 2008 (EST) ::::WTB un-nerf of spirits so more than 1 of a kind of spirt could be active. [[User:Misfate|'Misfate']] 22:00, 26 January 2008 (EST) :::I can see I'm not going to change anyone's mind. That's ok, as most people don't change their mind when a decision is reached. I'll continue to use and have good results with it, you can continue to not use it and go on with you life? Yea. Ok. Bluemilkman/Talk To Me 21:58, 26 January 2008 (EST) ::::I'm a male, by the way. -Shen 22:05, 26 January 2008 (EST) :::::lawl. [[User:Misfate|'Misfate']] 22:06, 26 January 2008 (EST) :::::I thought so, but I didn't want to make myself look stupid, haha. Ah, I love being in a good mood. Nothing ever bothers you when you're in a good mood. Know what I mean? Bluemilkman/Talk To Me 22:08, 26 January 2008 (EST) ::::::You scare me. [[User:Misfate|'Misfate']] 22:12, 26 January 2008 (EST) :::::::Why's that? I'm going to archive this pretty soon, it's taking up a lot of space, and it's been resolved. Bluemilkman/Talk To Me 22:20, 26 January 2008 (EST) ::::::::No idea. EPISCH. [[User:Misfate|'Misfate']] 22:23, 26 January 2008 (EST) :::::::::EPISCH? Bluemilkman/Talk To Me 22:25, 26 January 2008 (EST) ::::::::::I think it's Dutch for "epic". [[User:Misfate|'Misfate']] 22:26, 26 January 2008 (EST) Highly effective doesn't mean disproportionately low universality. Dark Morphon, InternetLol, Oblivion, Empty Orchestra. And remove Alpinista's too. -Shen 12:21, 26 January 2008 (EST) :Resolved. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 17:02, 26 January 2008 (EST) Requesting vote wipe, thanks in advance. -Shen 13:03, 26 January 2008 (EST) :Resolved. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 17:02, 26 January 2008 (EST) Alpinista needs a reason for a 5-5-5. -Shen 19:15, 26 January 2008 (EST) :Resolved. Mike Tycn(punch ) 19:56, 26 January 2008 (EST) Cabaex needs a reason. All the votes with a reason along the lines of "good damage" need to be removed; there's no Deep Wound, no KD, and it's pathetically easy to counter. Kwiet Oblivion's reason can't be allowed, nor can Jahora's. -Shen 19:44, 26 January 2008 (EST) :Dealt with by Armond. Mike Tycn(punch ) 19:56, 26 January 2008 (EST) Jonidroid's a sock. -Shen 21:23, 26 January 2008 (EST) :Resolved. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(sysop) 21:35, 26 January 2008 (EST) Oops, missed Talyn's, which says this is superior to similar ones. -Shen 21:38, 26 January 2008 (EST) Howlinghobo's a sock, Warrior Zez needs a better reason. RA is full of noobs. -Shen 09:21, 27 January 2008 (EST) :SwordofMorning's a sock too. -Shen 09:22, 27 January 2008 (EST) ::Struck Warrior Zez's vote. -- [[User:Scottie theNerd|'Scottie_theNerd']] (argue/ /complain) 09:25, 27 January 2008 (EST) :::So long as it's trashed! -Shen 09:29, 27 January 2008 (EST) Aubster needs a reason. -Shen 09:51, 27 January 2008 (EST) :Jahora's is wrong, there is cripple from Harrier's Grasp. -Shen 09:52, 27 January 2008 (EST) ::Build has been archived now, so votes are irrelevant. I'll resolve the votes anyway. -- [[User:Scottie theNerd|'Scottie_theNerd']] (argue/ /complain) 22:32, 27 January 2008 (EST) Enar needs a reason. -Shen 10:04, 27 January 2008 (EST) :As does Crusheer. -Shen 10:05, 27 January 2008 (EST) ::As does Rawr. Bluemilkman/Talk To Me 10:09, 27 January 2008 (EST) Decci does not have any contribs. -Shen 12:26, 27 January 2008 (EST) :Resolved. -- [[User:Scottie theNerd|'Scottie_theNerd']] (argue/ /complain) 22:30, 27 January 2008 (EST) Eloc's vote is wrong. Peter, Ferdarke, Warboss need a reason appropriate for the rating given. -Shen 13:24, 27 January 2008 (EST) :I got Ferdarke's and Warboss's. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(sysop) 14:09, 27 January 2008 (EST) A build that farms slowly is not a good build, availability for Paragons regardless. This is extremely inferior to D/Mo 130hp Dervish. Every vote that mentions how slow this build is needs to be stricken. -Shen 16:49, 27 January 2008 (EST) :If that's your logic surely everything is inferior to 55hp of one discription or another? you can't be that specific, with inferiority, i think it applies to similar builds more than anything (like 2 55 builds but one's just a crap load better than the other so the crap one is inferior) think of it as comparing fruit, you can say one apples better than another but you can't say that that apple is better than that apple (which is a banana....or something like that that makes sense XD)PheNaxKian (T/ ) 17:17, 27 January 2008 (EST) ::I'm talking about builds that are meant to farm the same areas. -Shen 17:18, 27 January 2008 (EST) :::My point still remains valid though, a 55hp would most likely pwn just about every other farming build there is. You can say it has inferior farming capabilites to abother build, but you can't say it's just plain inferior, otherwise we'd have to wipe half the votes of the 130 derv for being inferior to a 55 (these are all jsut examples)(i'm calling it a night now anyway XD) PheNaxKian (T/ ) 17:22, 27 January 2008 (EST) ::::Except for 55's work on Hydras that can't be KD'd. And this would be massacred by a hydra. I don't see your point. -Shen 17:26, 27 January 2008 (EST) :::::We've had a discussion about this already. Policy was written and it was moved to failed policies. This is exactly why I wanted someone to write that policy. The mindset of PvX is that some builds should be deleted because another profession can do it better, while other ones just stay up and don't say anything about the 55 being better. My view is that we should keep at least the best farmer from each profession, maybe the two best. But seeing how no one thought it was a good idea, all farmers except the 55 should be deleted because, according to PvXWiki:Build Deletion they are all inferior. Again, that's not going to happen though. Bluemilkman/Talk To Me 20:31, 27 January 2008 (EST) ::::::There are more ways to farm than just 55ing. Your argument defeats itself. -Shen 20:53, 27 January 2008 (EST) :::::::The point wasn't there was more ways of farming than 55, it was that all are inferior to it, so there would be no need to keep anything other than it, but instead of doing that we keep good farming buoilds from other profesions as well, which is really what we shoiuld do with this build,It's the best farming Para build from what i can see, so i think it should be kept to give paras the option to farm with for once =).PheNaxKian (T/ ) 05:13, 28 January 2008 (EST) ::::::::55ing is not the best way to farm things, nor is every other way of farming inferior. That said, builds like this simply aren't viable. With farming builds, either it works well all the time and easily hits good/great, or like this, it simply fails because it takes forever (or can't deal with any areas worth farming). -- Armond Warblade 05:28, 28 January 2008 (EST) :::::::::When i said 55-i was using it as an exmaple more than anything, i don't see why the build isn't viable? it might be slow but it works? look at the Build:A/Me_Perma_Shadow_Boss_Farmer , should we destroy this because it doesn't farm quickly, and is difficult to use (due to the tight timing), you can't simply destroy a build based on time it takes to completly, if it's slow jsut knock of a point for effectivness or something, don't trash the build as inferior, else half of the builds on this site might as well be destroyed Build:Team - Slaver's Exile or Build:Team - Urgoz B/P , they are considerably slow at what they're designed for, but they're good at it, hence we keep them, so if the para build works, even slowly, i'd say keep it....PheNaxKian (T/ ) 13:30, 28 January 2008 (EST) This build seems to have an edge on most other farming builds in at least one section - there's practically nothing to interrupt. It should be given some consideration just for that. --71.229 13:42, 28 January 2008 (EST) :Hence my one in universality. –[[User:Ichigo724|'Ichigo'724]] 16:00, 28 January 2008 (EST) Spikes great, has nice support, a voter disagrees and gave a 2. Voter thinks you disrupt spiking to constantly use draw, which that isn't the point of the build [[User:DestinyOfKiest|'♪Destiny Of Kiest♪']] (''talk''/ ) 16:54, 27 January 2008 (EST) :How does it spike great? — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 16:57, 27 January 2008 (EST) ::Uh? the chain deals a lot of damage, and has eremites as 1/2, crips, deepwounds, and you repeat... but thats now why it was put on the notice board :P [[User:DestinyOfKiest|'♪Destiny Of Kiest♪']] (''talk''/ ) 17:09, 27 January 2008 (EST) :::A whopping 2 attack spike? I cower in fear. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 17:11, 27 January 2008 (EST) ::::Skakids right with his vote, you'd have to stop mid spike to use Draw....PheNaxKian (T/ ) 17:12, 27 January 2008 (EST) :::::/seconded. This build is not as good as the other mels we have, you're sacrificing interrupts and the ims/wb for draw. Unequal trade.Bob fregman 17:14, 27 January 2008 (EST) ::::::No, you dont have to stop mid-spike, its just extra support for RA [[User:DestinyOfKiest|'♪Destiny Of Kiest♪']] (''talk''/ ) 17:24, 27 January 2008 (EST) :::::::You would have to stop mid spike to use it, otherwise you've got a dead party member! and if it's only for RA why's it on the main bar, and the ONLY monk skill, if it's specificly or that one area, either remove the skill and change the page to D/Any, or remove the GvG and TA tag and leave it as it is. Even then though the point remains valid, you'd have to stop mid spike in order to use it.PheNaxKian (T/ ) 13:32, 28 January 2008 (EST) ::::::::So ill suggest it as a variant and the rates that were bad should be removed, because i agree now that stopping midspike isnt the best. Yes, it is good for RA, gvg, not rly. All the votes are exactly the same as one of the votes that was removed by auron [[User:DestinyOfKiest|'♪Destiny Of Kiest♪']] (''talk''/ ) 16:14, 28 January 2008 (EST) Guild of Deals makes invalid points. Normally on a Dervish, Frenzy is bad, but with AoB in Frenzy, you have more defense than even a Warrior in Frenzy would have. A fully maintainable, instant casting, nigh-unstrippable IAS, is certainly better than a make-your-spike-predictable, 10 energy, 2/3 maintainable IAS that could be stripped. Using other stances such as Rush is irrelevant, because of the 33% IAS from AoB. Thanks. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 15:59, 28 January 2008 (EST) :Agreed, Frenzy + AoB = no problem at all'19pxCrossfirexiv ' 16:06, 28 January 2008 (EST) A few voters think the damage isn't enoguh to effectively kill, which it really is. More 1's and 0's because some voters disagree with the damage this build supplies. Meets all requirements, some ppl like it and voted high for damage, imo it does plenty of damage'19pxCrossfirexiv ' 16:08, 28 January 2008 (EST) :Also, one vote o and 1 because runes werent right. Major instead of minor by accident.19pxCrossfirexiv ''' 16:11, 28 January 2008 (EST) ::Mention specific votes. I revoted; my other one was before SP got nerfed, I believe. -Shen 17:18, 28 January 2008 (EST) ::: 1/2 of the votes state ( Not enough damage) which it really is. Also, a vote states (Major rune is fail and signet is predictable), changed the runes and signet isnt predictible for a spike because it is unused.19pxCrossfirexiv ' 18:09, 28 January 2008 (EST) ::::Specific means name of the voter. -Shen 18:11, 28 January 2008 (EST) :::::Since you sorta fail at refuting one vote, I'll do it for you. I deleted your comment because it contributed nothing. I hope that's alright. Timmy's should be removed because there isn't a major rune. Shadowsin's right, this has less damage than a SP sin. -Shen 18:32, 28 January 2008 (EST) :::::::Shadowsin's vote doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me either, 9 crit strikes is enough to hit the 2 energy breakpoint, re-investing to get crit strikes up to 13 isn't worth it either. I'd agree that a minor crit strikes run would be useful though.--Goldenstar 18:39, 28 January 2008 (EST) ::::::::Please Stop referring to the shadow prison build, it has been nerfed out of existence and Izzy isnt planning on changing it back.'19pxCrossfirexiv ' 18:43, 28 January 2008 (EST) :::::::::No it hasn't. Whoever is indenting my comment below, stop it. -Shen 18:52, 28 January 2008 (EST) Idklol's vote needs a reason. -Shen 17:55, 28 January 2008 (EST) :Skakid got it. -Shen 19:40, 28 January 2008 (EST) Highly effective doesn't mean how fast you farm, but the process of killing enemies while surviving! People that need to change their votes: Shogunshen, Bob fregman, Ichigo724, Napalm Flame, Teh Uber Pwnzer, Aesthetic, Armond, Colonel Hawk. Also I don't think it should be deleted be it has a high survivability rate and does pretty good damage. I think Skakid9090 should not be deleting votes. [[User:Jtfire55|'Jtfire55']] 17:37, 28 January 2008 (EST) :Survivability is taken for granted in farming builds. Otherwise, they wouldn't be able to farm. Highly effective correlates with high speed farming. Don't make a new topic please. -Shen 17:44, 28 January 2008 (EST) I'm not addressing the limited use for the build, but rather, its epic ineffectiveness. As compared to D/Mo 130hp Dervish, only one 3/4 sec attack is present, and Victorious Sweep's bonus damage is inferior to the automatic +30 from either Mystic or Eremite's, both of which are present in the 130hp Dervish. The 130hp can also DW, the fundamental difference that instantly makes the EDA version trash. Even with better attack skills implemented, EDA wastes elite on damage negation that is achieved much less conditionally and effectively by the 130hp Derv, and sacrifices DW. Every vote that says this is Great is invalid. -Shen 19:26, 28 January 2008 (EST) :Skakid got it. -Shen 20:09, 28 January 2008 (EST) Alpinista lacks a reason. At Noopposingparty's vote: While PvXwiki allows votes that say "works well" given the build actually does for reasons mentioned on previous votes and perhaps on the talk page, a 5-5-5 on a build which has received Trash votes with only "works well" as a reason does not suffice. -Shen 09:59, 27 January 2008 (EST) Justing6's vote. ''One of the few ways to make a paragon useful seriously should invalidate his vote. in general that page needs a little cleaning, though. voting is erratic. 08:47, 30 January 2008 (EST) :Agree, it's gone. ~~ [[User:frvwfr2|'frvwfr2']] (T/ /Sysop) 08:56, 30 January 2008 (EST) Flawed votes and votes lacking reason; Unaimed, sleepy almond, I Am A Raver, Tifa Yawa, Diablos Soul, SpiKy, Archer Black, and a few... otherwise smarter people. -- Mafaraxas 19:00, 29 January 2008 (EST) :Some of those are better than some of the 5-5-5's. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 21:22, 29 January 2008 (EST) ::Regardless, should probably be cleaned up. -- Mafaraxas 22:52, 29 January 2008 (EST) :::Mhm. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 23:40, 29 January 2008 (EST) :Skakid took care of it. -- Mafaraxas 03:44, 30 January 2008 (EST) Its used...all the time, i.e. 5 innovation.[[User:Teh Uber Pwnzer|''' — Teh Uber Pwnzer']] 23:53, 30 January 2008 (EST) :What's the problem, specifically? -- [[User:Scottie theNerd|'Scottie_theNerd']] (argue/ /complain) 00:02, 31 January 2008 (EST) ::People '''not' 5-5-5ing it. The build has no flaws.— [[User:Cheese Slaya|'Cheese Slaya']] (Talk) 00:06, 31 January 2008 (EST) :::I've struck the one vote that listed Innovation as 0. There's a 3-vote and a few 4-votes, but there's nothing bizarrely wrong with those. -- [[User:Scottie theNerd|'Scottie_theNerd']] (argue/ /complain) 00:16, 31 January 2008 (EST) ::::Cheese, is it honestly that big a deal? It's at 4.97... -- Armond Warblade 02:17, 31 January 2008 (EST) :::::By my definition innovation is not whether something is meta. Innovation is whether a build does an old job in a different way. The shock axe is hardly worthy of 5 innovation considering it's a PvP standard. Mike Tycn(punch ) 02:31, 31 January 2008 (EST) ::::::Yeah, we need a better name for it. --71.229 17:04, 31 January 2008 (EST) Infidel's vote (the only one:) ): "A good PvE Smiter deserves 5 in innovation. And at the end: 2 innovation because he thinks not many pearple will use the build. That is not the innovation is about, and argues against himself as I see. Voidwalker 07:47, 31 January 2008 (EST) :Yeah, removed, I think it deserved it... kinda confusing. Another admin check it please? ~~ [[User:frvwfr2|'frvwfr2']] (T/ /Sysop) 08:58, 31 January 2008 (EST) In both cases, none of those that have commented or rated either of these builds understand them nor have they tested them. I've played my Arcane Shadows time and time again successfully in un-organized PvP (such as RA and AB). These builds can perform effectively, and they have the proper skills to ensure their survival when Shadow Form runs out. On top of that, they can deal moderate DPS. You'd have to go through both the talk pages and rating pages to understand this issue. I think that both of these builds deserve a better and more thorough look, as well as testing from other members -Mike :No, they don't. No sensible person would run a lousy Assassin build that deals horrid damage over "Oh look! I can be invincible! Haha!" In the end, everyone else on your team dies while you throw your weak attacks at a Monk and the game times out, with your team the loser. So yes, it deserves a 0-0-0. --20pxGuildof 17:58, 31 January 2008 (EST) ::This issue does not require admin intervention. The admin noticeboard is not the place to complain about people disagreeing with you. -- [[User:Scottie theNerd|'Scottie_theNerd']] (argue/ /complain) 21:16, 31 January 2008 (EST) :::Tell it to Ichigo724 he made them go to Admin notice board, look at his talk page.-- Korineczek--( ) 07:59, 1 February 2008 (EST) In both cases, none of those that have commented or rated either of these builds understand them nor have they tested them. I've played my Arcane Shadows time and time again successfully in un-organized PvP (such as RA and AB). These builds can perform effectively, and they have the proper skills to ensure their survival when Shadow Form runs out. On top of that, they can deal moderate DPS. You'd have to go through both the talk pages and rating pages to understand this issue. I think that both of these builds deserve a better and more thorough look, as well as testing from other members -Mike :We are tired of explaining why they are bad. You are the one who doesn't understand. Your substituting game mechanics and good players' actions with "well, noobs attack this and being able to survive while letting your team get slaughtered is good."[[User:Teh Uber Pwnzer|''' — Teh Uber Pwnzer']] 20:24, 31 January 2008 (EST) ::See above. -- [[User:Scottie theNerd|'Scottie_theNerd']] (argue/ /complain) 21:16, 31 January 2008 (EST) Shadowsin's vote doesn't make sense. all 1's... i think he is missing the point of that build'19pxCrossfirexiv ' 16:38, 31 January 2008 (EST) :I'm not sure... it's for spikes right? Then SoM won't be used... He does have a point, I'll let another admin decide. ~~ [[User:frvwfr2|'frvwfr2']] (T/ /Sysop) 20:30, 31 January 2008 (EST) ::SoM is fine for spikes, run in ha all the time.— [[User:Cheese Slaya|'Cheese Slaya']] (Talk) 20:47, 31 January 2008 (EST) :::SoM works in spikes what are you talking about? [[User:DestinyOfKiest|'♪Destiny Of Kiest♪']] ([[User talk:DestinyOfKiest|''talk]]/ ) 11:08, 1 February 2008 (EST) ::::Theres 2 more 1-1-1 votes. again, someone plz remove they dontunderstand.19pxCrossfirexiv ' 00:34, 3 February 2008 (EST) So liek, authorz vote 5s. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta]] 19px (talk| ) 00:59, 1 February 2008 (EST) :I got it. ¬ Wizårdbõÿ777(sysop) 08:05, 1 February 2008 (EST) ::It's back. And dark morphon's vote could use some looking at, because I'm fairly sure loling isn't a good reason for voting. Lord Belar 17:30, 1 February 2008 (EST) :::It's in trash, just let it be. — Skadiddly슴Mc슴Diddles 17:31, 1 February 2008 (EST) ::::It's the principle of the matter. Letting author 5-5-5s and no reason votes stay sends a bad message. Lord Belar 17:37, 1 February 2008 (EST) :::::Resolved. I need to suck less at typing while removing votes. -Shen 17:43, 1 February 2008 (EST) The 4-4-4 vote that calls it average... i can has understandign that 4/5 is gud vote no average? 10:04, 1 February 2008 (EST) :Mmm, I think it's fair. ~~ [[User:frvwfr2|'frvwfr2']] (T/ /Sysop) 14:02, 1 February 2008 (EST) 0-0-0 votes, make no sense. Has no energy probs and "wastes power", how? Nothing stops you from autoattacking, and you get a really strong spike every 15 sec (piuos assault rc's in 12 sec anyways). [[User:Swiftslash|'Swiftslash \\']] ( *''sandbox'') 03:23, 2 February 2008 (EST) :I'd take a tree over that any day. Still got plenty of autoattack damage, still got plenty of spiking, has a lot more defense, and doesn't waste two skill slots on weak, unnecessary hexes. -- Armond Warblade 05:47, 2 February 2008 (EST) ::It still wins.— [[User:Cheese Slaya|'Cheese Slaya']] (Talk) 11:48, 2 February 2008 (EST) :::Tree wins yes, because it's betta for overall pressure. This is gudder for spikes. [[User:Swiftslash|'Swiftslash \\']] ( *''sandbox'') 16:50, 2 February 2008 (EST) ::::Oh I forgot my point, not being a tree doesn't warrand 0-0-0. It's a strong effective spike with snare and shadowstep with emanage. [[User:Swiftslash|'Swiftslash \\']] ( *''sandbox'') 16:51, 2 February 2008 (EST) :::::It warrants a 0 0 0 when a build just like it got unfavored, and that build is just terrible tbh. two shadowsteps is excessive, the mystisym attrib points make me cry, and it was just a bloody dupe of the other one, btw bob said IAS only covers half your spikes? well it doesnt, it lasts a grand total of 3 seconds (if your good) because pious assault removes it, and it has a 28 second down time after that. tbh its really really bad. and bob and cheese obvious balance votes represent that.--[[User:Shadowsin|'Shadow'sin]]image:Shadowsin_sig.PNG 17:20, 2 February 2008 (EST) :::::::*Rapta Last edit: 18:43, 24 Jan 2008 (EST) Becomes only slightly more usable after Pious Assault buff. Rest of the bar, however, is pretty meh. SP has no real purpose anymore on non-Assassin after its numerous nerfs. Not too effective in major areas. *Cheese Slaya Last edit: 05:52, 26 Jan 2008 (EST) rapta nailed this one *hmm.... ^^ lol wut? so one extra long recharging shadowstep and no optionalslot/interrupt = 4.7 and the one he voted 2.4Edit:(my bad, not much better.) is baed because it uses SP? hmm?--[[User:Shadowsin|'Shadow'sin]]image:Shadowsin_sig.PNG 17:26, 2 February 2008 (EST) :Second shadow step makes this able to make a "surprise spike" every 15 sec, which is quite different. If HoF bothers you so much I'll just remove it and make it variant along with ddagger. It's mainly to speed up CV 1/2 of the spikes. [[User:Swiftslash|'Swiftslash \\']] ( *''sandbox'') 06:21, 3 February 2008 (EST) ReZDoGG's vote. "Seems useless. Death Pact is terrible, Aura has really short duration now, One heal is useless, Holy Veil is waste of a skill, Warmongers has long recharge now, One Spirit will die easily. Don't Make much sense." Err... Death Pact is great, Aura is Great and has very little down time, one heal that removes conditions is good, and Holy Veil is not a waste of a skill. Lacks understanding. --20pxGuildof 10:12, 2 February 2008 (EST) :Resolved. -- [[User:Scottie theNerd|'Scottie_theNerd']] (argue/ /complain) 10:41, 2 February 2008 (EST)